Get bipartisan, cut spending

  • Follow Letters

Millions of Americans watched with bated breath as the sequester saga unfolded. On stage left was the president refusing to compromise with the “loyal opposition” (the Republicans) on decreased entitlement spending, among other issues. On stage right were the Republican congressmen refusing to consider any deficit reduction plan that raised taxes for the more affluent citizens. Meanwhile, the White House PR team painted an apocalyptic picture of America, post-sequester, if the Republican-dominated House of Representatives refused to yield to the president’s intransigent conditions.

Well, a new day has dawned, sequestration has become law and, contrary to the predictions of doom and gloom, we are all still here. The financial consequences of across-the-board budget cuts, if and when they are completely rolled out, will not be what anyone really wanted. However, this scenario should be a wake-up call to rein in federal spending that has been out of control, a call that should have been made some time ago.

Bill Clinton, far from my favorite president, was able to reach across the aisle, when necessary, to get bipartisan and bicameral cooperation on difficult but important pieces of legislation. Perhaps President Obama should take some pages out of the Clinton playbook and use this opportunity to reconsider his second term’s disdainful approach to members of the other party. After all, Mr. Obama has nearly four years to truly become the president of all Americans rather than of just the 53 percent who re-elected him.

Only by placing the best interests of all citizens above those of one party will his administration be able to begin the difficult but essential process of economic reform through more prudent spending and taxing measures. Not to do so inevitably will bankrupt a great nation, leaving a grim legacy for our children and grandchildren.

Lawrence Devoe

Augusta

Comments (8) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
nofanofobama
6825
Points
nofanofobama 03/21/13 - 06:13 am
3
1
obumler will not reach across

obumler will not reach across the aisle...its not in his genes..he thinks he a dictator. clinton--he was not even in my top ten as favorites..but he was smart enough to compromise even if he was dragged to the table..and thanks to his compromise we had a few surplus's because of true entitlement reform..an idea he orginial hated and refused to sign..now he get credit for the good economy of the 90'S , even though he benefited from a data-com bubble and republican congress..again obumler wont compromise, he hates those who oppose him and would rather be the campaigner n chief..

deestafford
27791
Points
deestafford 03/21/13 - 10:46 am
2
1
People misunderstand compromise and what it's about.

There can only be compromise if both sides have the same goals and objectives in mind. Right now there is no common goal for the two parties. The Republicans believe in individualism, smaller government, less spending, lower taxes, balanced budgets, strong national defense, less duplicative programs, power at the state level rather than at the federal level, originalist judges and justices, fewer people on welfare programs as a measure of how well the country is doing, developing energy resources anywhere we can, less ownership of government lands, health insurance being bought across state lines and be ala carte purchases with no government mandates, and the list could go further but you get the point.
Now what are the democrats goal? Simple, the exact opposite of all the above.
The only chink in the above is that not all republicans want those things outlined above, but most do.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 03/21/13 - 10:49 am
1
1
deestafford. You summed that
Unpublished

deestafford. You summed that up quite well!

Jon Lester
2314
Points
Jon Lester 03/21/13 - 11:10 am
1
2
If we had any principles left

we wouldn't be spending nearly as much on defense. Is it really the American way to be on the side of Sunni monarchs against a Shi'ite nation that actually functions more or less as a republic, or to give money and arms to a decidedly ethnocentric regime that denies equal rights to half of its inhabitants? And why even be in Central Asia if we've given up on democratizing the region, when the Collective Security Treaty Organization is perfectly capable of securing its own backyard?

dichotomy
33136
Points
dichotomy 03/21/13 - 12:01 pm
2
1
deestafford.....yes, well

deestafford.....yes, well said. The issues of debt, taxes, and government overreach have driven us from a basically centrist country with minor differences in our beliefs on social policy and governmental power into having vehement diametrically opposed philosophies. Half of the country is hollering "turn right" and the other half is hollering "turn left" and the T intersection is in sight.....but the frozen government GPS unit keeps saying "go straight ahead". I think we are going to crash.

Fiat_Lux
15457
Points
Fiat_Lux 03/21/13 - 01:17 pm
1
1
Too bad Obummer and his minions

don't listen to people like Dr. Devoe. There are lots of people around with his level of insight, but the people who should be paying attention don't want to be distracted by simple wisdom and plain facts.

After all, there's got to be another non-crisis that needs hyperbolic political fomenting hiding out somewhere in our near future.

Darby
25811
Points
Darby 03/21/13 - 03:16 pm
2
1
"Bill Clinton,........

...was able to reach across the aisle, when necessary, to get bipartisan and bicameral cooperation"
.
Instead of "was able" perhaps you should have used "was willing". Clinton had more flexible, pragmatic advisors who, right or wrong were interested in the legacy he would leave. Obama and his fellow travelers don't give a rat's heinie.

They see nothing beyond their agenda to convert and subvert the very fabric and nature of American culture and government.

That will not change until the moving vans take the last of him from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Young Fred
17467
Points
Young Fred 03/21/13 - 03:38 pm
1
1
deestaford said:

“The Republicans believe in individualism, smaller government, less spending, lower taxes, balanced budgets, strong national defense, less duplicative programs, power at the state level rather than at the federal level, originalist judges and justices, fewer people on welfare programs as a measure of how well the country is doing, developing energy resources anywhere we can, less ownership of government lands, health insurance being bought across state lines and be ala carte purchases with no government mandates, and the list could go further but you get the point.”

If only it were true!!! Maybe I could have a little more optimism.

Unfortunately the Republican party has morphed into, democrat-light (?). It’s pretty disgusting if you get right down to the nitty-gritty. There is going to be an intercine battle for the soul of the Rep party and it ain’t going to be pretty. The party will either shape up or there will be a third party spin-off. Regardless, the Dem’s will reap the benefits, and our country will become more and more like a weird morph of China/Greece.

I try to have faith in my fellow citizens, but I’m afraid the writing is on the wall.

Thank God for the South! This will be the last bastion!

Darby
25811
Points
Darby 03/21/13 - 06:04 pm
1
1
"If only it were true!!! ....

Maybe I could have a little more optimism."

I believe it is true, however too many GOP'ers are just a bit weak in the knees when faced with the temptations of DC.

Kind of like the church with it's backsliders.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs